0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Lookout, it does rather go without saying that he's looking for any little thing that would point to innocence. Bit of a waste of time looking for guilt when he's considered guilty, isn't it?
Ann Eaton told the Jury this in regards to her understanding of the silencer. "At the time I did not know whether it was rabbit blood or what. and I thought the jewellery was the most important thing, turns out I was wrong."This is a lie. Because the previous year her account on the same subject was as follows. "We discussed the implication of how this silencer could be in the gun cupboard with blood and paint on it. Obviously if it was being alleged that somebody had had a brainstorm and shot dead four people they would surely not have stopped to remove the silencer, put it back in the gun cupboard, go back upstairs and shoot herself dead. Contact was made with the police about the discovery of the blood and paint stained silencer."Ann Eaton told the court she thought it was rabbits blood.RIVLIN: How could you imagine that the blood at the end of the silencer might be a rabbits blood?ANN EATON: I don't know.RIVLIN: That is what you told the court. How could you imagine that it might be a rabbits blood?ANN EATON: Jeremy said he had been shooting rabbits the night before.However Jeremy said he did not get a chance to shoot them. . Ann Eaton knew Jeremy said this and wrote this in her notes. Hence her answer "Jeremy said he had been shooting rabbits the night before." as for why she thought rabbit blood was on the silencer is clearly a lie.Furthermore if she did indeed think it was rabbit blood and had no importance why did she report it to the police in the first place? ARLIDGE: As a result of that being found, were police contacted?ANN EATON: Yes, Witham PoliceARLIDGE: Do you know the date on which that took place?ANN EATON: Saturday night. ARLIDGE: That very evening? ANN EATON: Yes. MR. Justice Drake: (To the witness): Q: Who actually contacted them?ANN EATON: It was probably me, but I cannot remember, but Witham Police were contacted.
I really cant understand why the police would not have made statements immediately on the 12th /13th august . Or perhaps they did and they are missing . Even if the blood turned out not to be human that is what the family are saying they told the police so by not taking a atement until weeks later lays the whole thing open to critisism .
So this is why he's not worrying because he's got nothing to fear which an innocent person hasn't. If I owned a mobile phone I'd never worry about what was on it. The same goes for my laptop and even handbags----I've got nothing to hide nor worry about and that's the situation that Jeremy's in no matter who's going through his files/documents----he's an open book.
I suspect he's looking for technicalities as opposed to innocence. According to what he'd said in letters, he's had "everything" for years.
No, he won't get a technicality, not that he wants one but he'd never be granted one.
you never know lookout
so we have to ask the question why did she not tell the truth ? why was she denying what was in her statements ? Is it because it looked like they were out to get Jeremy from the start ? Not really any shame in that if they believed him to be guilty ? I am sort of confused .
Yes you are confused.
